Well the JK 1.2 branch should be fixed and when we'll have something stable, we could start a new branch.
BTW, there was many bugs related to LB in jk for ages :-) 2005/5/10, Klaus Wagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 11:33:56AM +0200, Mladen Turk wrote: > > There was a nasty bug in load balancer, that basically > > broke the failover. > > > > Interesting is that it was spotted only when the release > > was made, so this gives one reason more for making some > > sort of releases and binaries to attract more users to > > actually do the testing. > > > > My question is what to do? > > I am observing these mod_jk issues quite some time lurking on > tomcat-dev and from a user POV I'd really appreciate a fork of > mod_jk into 1.2 stable and 1.3 (or whatsoever) unstable. > > During 1.2 development after 1.2.5 serious changes have been added > that a) broke compabilty and b) added new features that introduced > a lot of new issues and bugs. > > Don't take me wrong, mod_jk is a great peace of software and the > new features are really good in concept, but IMHO I would not consider > any mod_jk release after 1.2.6 stable. > > Mladen has done a great Job in improving mod_jk, but I think that this > sort of changes require a new branch. > > And finally another issue about mod_jk ... lack of dokumentation. > > I think I have seen the local_worker issue several times on the dev > list, and I am not watching the user list. Wouldn't it be easier to > document the newer redirect features than answering tons of mails > from users that ask for it. > > I am neither a contirbutor, nor a developer nor a member of asf, > so my opinion may not weight much... > > regards Klaus > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
